


E184 
,J5 W16 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



00005^^317 








*o' J, 




v»tv 














? % \ 






•*P »i^* ^ V • *'•- ^ aP »!^L% *> V ■ '••- 









A>"^ »^f^» <£^ n 



o ^* 









»•- ^o^ : % i 









v-o^ 


















v^ 




^0 o ° " * O AT 




A* V< V 





*^o 







»* •^L'* 



• • • .\. 



*?% 




9 » 










, 1 • o 








Tie. * 




lV _ o N • _ **i 




5 ".•lit.'. ^ V .«••• ^ev 



F o ?*W* % * _o 











J CoV 






6*°k 



^ ^ 






Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2010 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/organizationprobOOwald 



THE ORGANIZATION PROBLEM 
of 

Jewish Community Life 
in America 



by 



MORRIS D. WALDMAN 

Executive Director of the United Hebrew Charities 
of the City of New York 



An address delivered at the 

National Conference of Jewish Charities 

Indianapolis, Ind., May 9, 1916. 






In the discussion of this topic we must at the outset assume thai 
there is valid reason for the existence of distinctly Jewish communi- 
ties wherever a minyan (at least ten adult Jews) dwell in one place, 
because their interests in some respects are distinct from the inter- 
ests of other people living in the same place. These special interests 
may be religious, educational and philanthropic — never political. It 
is cause for satisfaction that the Jews of this country have never 
presented a homogeneous attitude, as Jews, toward any political 
question, except where such a question involved the rights and 
dignities of American citizenship, as in the Russian passport matter. 
Here the Jews united to secure the abrogation of the treaty with 
Russia, because that treaty, in discriminating against the Jews of 
the United States, was an affront to American citizenship. Attempts 
on the part of politicians to create Jewish political clubs and groups 
have met uniformly with such vehement resentment on the part of 
all Jewish elements as to indicate unmistakably that in politics the 
Jews do not desire to be a community. Political elections have 
shown that Jews are divided on political questions so freely that 
there cannot be the barest suspicion that racial or religious con- 
siderations at any time constitute a basis for political affiliations. 

In religious matters and in philanthropic affairs they have fol- 
lowed distinct lines, quite like other religious and racial elements 
in the population. But in these fields they have not been united ; in 
fact, there have been such sharp divisions as to make the word 
"community," as descriptive of their organized charities, an inac- 
curate term, if not an actual misnomer. 

The reasons for these divisions are to be traced ultimately to the 
fact that the Jews of America, though ethnologically one race, come 
from many different countries of the globe and naturally possess dif- 
ferences of traditions, customs, theologies, language, outline, and fre- 
quently even of physique. If we add to these differences in economic 
condition, perhaps the most vital of all factors, and the difference 



in the date of their settlement in this country, we will not wonder 
at the lack of unity and homogeneity that obtains among them. 

Had the influx of Jews into this country from western and 
eastern Europe occurred at the same time, the difficulties in pro- 
moting a community of thought and action would have been much 
less, in spite of the differences obtaining among them. It has been 
customary for the early settler to regard the later arrival as inferior. 
The tendency of the one-year immigrant to regard his fellow-towns- 
man who has just arrived as a "green-horn," an inferior being, has 
been so common as to prove the subject of humorous treatment by 
Yiddish writers and playwrights. 

The tendency, therefore, on the part of the earlier German Jew- 
ish settlers to look askance upon the later Russian Jewish immigrants 
was not to be wondered at, especially as Yiddish, the language 
which the newcomer spoke, appeared to the others as a badly lacer- 
ated tongue. In addition, their uncouth appearance, their ancient 
ritualism and their poverty combined to stamp them, in the eyes of 
the older comfortably situated and more polished co-religionists, as 
of inferior caste. 

Then, too, the two main points of contact between the two ele- 
ments were such as to provoke friction. The first was intimate 
industrial contact. In the main, the older settlers, already firmly 
established and prosperous, were largely of the employing class — 
merchants and manufacturers. The newcomers, arriving penniless, 
were happy to secure employment in their establishments. The 
antagonisms generally obtaining between labor and capital could only 
help to intensify the distaste already existing. Where the employees, 
whether through shrewdness or self-denial and resourcefulness, be- 
came a business competitor, the feeling became resentful and the 
notions of caste grew stronger:. 

The second point of contact was, unfortunately, the charitable 
organization. As soon as Russian Jewish immigration began, the 
Jews of this country organized and raised funds to help the new- 
comers. The spirit which actuated them forms one the brightest 
pages in the history of Jewish philanthropy in this country. The 
help they rendered was both intelligent and generous, testifying to 
the good-heartedness and liberality of the "German" Jews. But 
contact with the dependent and poverty-stricken elements of any 
people is not conducive to respect for them. The erroneous and 
deplorable, though natural, impression gained ground even among 
the best men and women that these applicants for relief were typical 



of all the immigrants from eastern Europe. There was quickly 
established between the two elements the unfortunate relation of 
benefactor and beneficiary, which was made still more difficult by 
unsympathetic treatment on the part of untrained and ill-paid 
charity clerks and even ignorant volunteer workers, on the one hand, 
and an extreme sensitiveness and emotionalism, on the other hand, 
on the part of those who sought aid. 

Under these circumstances it was but natural, as the newcomers 
became more firmly established, for them to organize their mutual 
aid societies and even their own charitable organizations. Though 
they respected the "German" Jews' capacity for organization, they 
were not in sympathy with the business methods in vogue with their 
charities. Furthermore, they were not invited in any way to take 
substantial part in the work of the older philanthropic agencies; so 
when they felt the call for social service, they naturally organized 
their own machinery. 

The result is that there have been developed in every community 
of any considerable size charitable organizations of varied character, 
which have frequently duplicated the work of older organizations 
and have followed policies and methods not approved by these or- 
ganizations. The aloofness on the part of many well-to-do Russian 
Jews from the older charitable organizations has, moreover, tended 
to give those supporting them the impression that the former are 
niggardly and lacking in a sense of communal responsibility. 

Then, again, world currents in'Jewish life have moved the newer 
elements of the people profoundly, whereas the older elements have 
been quite indifferent and sometimes antagonistic. The Zionist 
movement, regardless of what our views may be with respect to its 
final purpose, must be conceded to be a remarkable renascence of 
Jewish racial self-respect and dignity. For the large part, it has 
been viewed with disapproval and distrust, and even apprehension, 
by the older settlers, who, basking in the sunshine of American 
liberty of conscience and action, feared the effect upon our non- 
Jewish neighbors and fellow-citizens. Socialism, which had gained 
many adherents among the newcomers of the wage-earning and pro- 
fessional classes, was another world-current which disturbed the 
placidity of the bourgeois life-stream of the older inhabitants, who 
confused and confounded it with anarchism and regarded it as a 
grave danger to their comfort. 

Thus, these conservative Jews, who had by their words and deeds 
striven hard to vindicate their reputation as law-abiding and patri- 



otic Americans, were placed in the position of apologizing to their 
equally conservative and patriotic non-Jewish fellow-citizens for 
the disagreeable and, to them, questionable theories and practices 
of their alien co-religionists. 

Now that the eastern European immigrants have become numer- 
ically predominant and many of them prosperous, they desire par- 
ticipation in the larger affairs of life. Some of them have become 
impatient with the present communal leadership and with what they 
consider undemocratic methods employed by that leadership. They 
are agitated by a strong desire to have a corresponding voice in 
the selection of the leadership. The European war, with the uncer- 
tainties of its outcome, has afforded them an opportunity of arous- 
ing nation-wide interest in any sympathy for their plans to establish 
a congress in the face of opposition on the part of those who 
heretofore have been the spokesmen and leaders of American 
Jewry. This movement has, unhappily, sharply accentuated the dis- 
satisfaction arising out of the many differences to which I have 
alluded, and has thereby made increasingly difficult, for the time 
being at any rate, the task of those who have advocated and labored 
for a united Jewry. The issues have been somewhat confused. 
There are essentially two issues : one of general policy with regard 
to the political situation of Jews in foreign countries ; the other a 
question of the organization of the Jewish people of America. If 
the second issue can be satisfactorily settled, the first will prove less 
difficult. I shall revert to this at some length later. I have here 
attempted merely very briefly to analyze the more important factors 
which have been responsible for the gap which has prevailed, and 
which has made difficult the unification of effort for the common 
welfare. 

That it is desirable for the common good to secure unity of 
interest and of purpose among these various groups is a premise that 
we all, I take it, are prepared to establish. In order to do this, we 
must at the very beginning emphasize as strongly as possible that 
a union cannot be brought about unless it is predicated upon the 
basic principle of mutual understanding and mutual respect. Be- 
cause this principle has not been uniformly recognized — indeed, fre- 
quently violated — these differences have in some respects not only 
been obliterated, but accentuated. 



II. 

In the consideration of this subject, it would be well to consider 
the organization problems of local communities on the one hand, 
and of the national community on the other. 

What are the problems of a local community? What are its 
needs — religious, industrial, educational and philanthropic? What 
are its resources ? What is its machinery for utilizing these resources 
and supplying these needs? What are the dangers which threaten 
the community? What are its safeguards against them, and its 
means to prevent them? What is its contact with the general com- 
munity of which it forms a part? 

The smaller the community, the easier it is to answer these ques- 
tions and the simpler its task to effect proper co-operation on the 
part of all its component parts, be they individual or groups. In 
the main, the problems are the same in the large communities, 
though more complex. In a survey of a dozen of the larger com- 
munities of the interior, recently made, I found different kinds, 
ranging from the very loosely co-ordinated to the closely united. 
In none was there found a completely organized community. Where 
solidarity or cohesiveness was conspicuous, it obtained chiefly with 
regard to one aspect of Jewish community life — that is, with respect 
to its philanthropic interests. Indeed, this phase of communal activ- 
ity has been the be-all and end-all apparently of community planning 
and articulation. Few even of the most active leaders in these com- 
munities have had more than philanthropic perspective. The concept 
"federation of charities" has been to them the final word and ultimate 
idea defining community life. The religious problems, if they have 
not been of negligible interest, have been considered largely of a 
private character, circumscribed at best by the walls of the syna- 
gogue to which the people have happened to belong. The industrial 
problems have not been considered a legitimate concern of the com- 
munity, except in so far as they have resulted in dependency, when 
they became an object with which the Charities had to deal. The 
education of the children and the youth of the community has like- 
wise been ignored as a community problem, and, like the religious 
affairs, has been left to parents, except in those few instances where 
children are inmates of institutions supported by the community; 
and perhaps in some degree to the meagre facilities for Jewish educa- 
tion afforded in the social centers supported by the community. 
Where from time to time the sentiment of the community on other 
than philanthropic subjects required expression, it has been voiced, 



not attthoritively, but by an individual or individuals who, by reason 
of prominence or ability, were called upon or themselves offered 
to do so. In the smaller communities this has usually been a satis- 
factory method ; in the larger communities it has not been so 
satisfactory. Some times it has been embarrassing. 

In order to develop a rich and comprehensive community life we 
must enlarge our vision and see beyond the philanthropic boundaries. 
We must understand that happily, after all, only a very small pro- 
portion of our people are in need of chariable aid ; but that a large 
proportion need aid of a different kind, which they can only prop- 
erly procure by a union of forces, of which they themselves should 
form an important part. They must be afforded reasonable industrial 
opportunities and be protected against industrial exploitation ; they 
must be given educational facilities where they are not provided by 
government ; they must be protected against all disintegrating forces 
which surround them and threaten their physical and spiritual well- 
being, by being furnished wholesome diversions and religious and 
ethical training, and free scope, too, to conserve and express the 
culture which they have brought with them as a heritage from the 
past. They should be encouraged to organize their own activities 
and to develop them, be they along industrial or social or religious 
lines, even if the character of such organizations may not be pre- 
cisely the kind we would create for them. Must they unite into labor 
organizations for their protection ? Then let them ; indeed, help 
them, because the more strongly they are organized the more re- 
sponsible and responsive will they be to public sentiment. Do they 
desire to form mutual aid societies ? Let them ; indeed, encourage 
them in every way, for there is no more potent protection against 
economic disaster and no more effective group discipline than this 
form of organization. Do they desire to worship God in the same 
way as their fathers and adhere to their ritual observances and train 
their children in the same conservative way? Let them, and aid them, 
even though we may not ourselves observe these forms of worship 
or educate our children by their curriculum, for there is no surer 
means to promote good citizenship, respect for law and order and 
civil responsibility. 

It is contrary to all historic experience to expect all humanity 
to be cast into one mould. The human melting pot is fiction and 
unreality. Where races and nationalities have disappeared they have 
been destroyed by conquering races and nations ; they have not been 
voluntarity assimilated. Freedom to a race or group to develop its 
own culture is the surest safeguard against hyphenism. In England, 



where the Jewish spirit has been least suppressed and where Jewish 
religious life has been least hampered by racial and religious preju- 
dice, there has developed a loyalty and devotion to the country on 
the part of its Jewish subjects not exceeded in intensity by those 
whose British blood can be traced back for centuries. Does the dis- 
tinctly Jewish culture perhaps express itself crudely or in uncouth 
form ? Let this not annoy us ; with our help it can soon be made 
acceptable and attractive. 

Some may think that as we have drawn the line at political 
organization, so should we avoid including in our community life 
all considerations of an industrial character. In their opinion, issues 
between labor and capital, employees and employer, are so vital in 
effect and so delicate in character that they may prove to be the rocks 
upon which the community organization may be wrecked. More- 
over, it appears to many that there is nothing of a sectarian character 
in the relations between Jewish employer and employee. There are 
very few industries, furthermore, where some non-Jews are not 
employed. In small cities industrial relations do not ordinarily as- 
sume a Jewish character or involve the need for the Jewish com- 
munity's interest, except where work must be found for the Jewish 
unemployed or where race discrimination asserts itself against them. 
In the large cities, however, certain industries have developed to a 
large degree on Jewish lines — notably, the garment industries. The 
manufacturers on the one hand are nearly all, if not all, Jews, and 
the workers have organized as distinctly Jewish trade unions — for 
example, the United Hebrew Trades and the Workman's Circle. 
What they do, therefore, affects not only the community at large, 
but particularly their fellow-Jews. In the labor parade of Monday 
of last week, the Poale Zion, a Zionist labor circle, marched along 
Fifth Avenue singing the Zionist national anthem, : 'Hatikvah." 
Though it is difficult to see the relation between the cloak makers' 
lockout and the hay fields of Merchaviah, it does indicate that the 
Judaism of the Jew in America is no longer confined to the hearth 
and the synagogue and the charities, but so permeates his life as to 
be warp and woof of its whole fabric. This being so, the com- 
munity cannot evade the responsibility of reckoning with the indus- 
trial aspects of Jewish life any more than it can with regard to its 
other phases. 

Is there such a perfect community anywhere in this country as 
has been pictured? Not that I know of. In New York such a com- 
munity has been planned, but has not as yet been completely 
achieved. It has been handicapped at the outset by the name it 



adopted, "Kehflla." This name has gfven rise in certain quarters 
to an impression that the organization constitutes an imperium in 
imperio. The impression also has been wide-spread among many 
that this organization concerns itself only with orthodox religious 
affairs, with such subjects as Kashruth (the dietary laws) and He- 
brew education. In reality, the purpose has been to develop a central 
community organization, with authority to function in communal 
matters of every kind. The source of that authority was to be all 
the people of the community ; an organization, if you will, of all 
organizations, uptown and downtown, reform and orthodox, edu- 
cational, religious, philanthropic, industrial and social. 

In a free American city a sectarian community life, unlike that 
in eastern European countries, where it has governmental sanction 
and responsibility, depends upon the voluntary co-operation of the 
people. Because of misunderstandings of its purpose and prejudices- 
entertained by some elements against others, and even, unfortunately, 
because of personal acrimony among some of the leaders, the efforts 
to bring about a union of forces on this broad basis have met with 
serious obstacles at every turn. But in spite of these difficulties, the 
patient and persistent labors of its leaders have achieved some part 
of the object in view. The chaos obtaining among a million and a 
quarter people — congregated from all parts of the world, with their 
conflicting economic, religious and social interests — has by no means 
been transformed as yet into an orderly system of effective co- 
ordination and mutual good-will. But some order has been brought 
out of the choatic conditions prevailing in the Jewish educational 
field, a remarkable achievement in itself. Jewish education on 
orthodox lines may appear to the non-orthodox as unnecessary, or 
even to be discouraged; yet the thoughtful of every shade of 
theological belief have begun to realize the great need for such edu- 
cation and the need for its standardization. That is why many 
reform and even non-observant Jews in New York have contributed 
generously to the funds of the Kehilla for this purpose. 

Considerable co-ordination and authority have been developed in 
the public ritual life of our orthodox co-religionists with regard to 
Kashruth, mikvehs, ghet, and provisional synagogues for the fall 
holidays. Some will question the propriety of the Jewish com- 
munity as a whole being involved in such issues. But there, too, it 
must be conceded that these issues do affect non-observant Jews, 
especially when abuses have developed. When Jewish ritualism be- 
comes commercialized the reputation of the Jews as a whole suffers. 
When the mikvehs. or ritual bathing places, are found by the city 

10 



department of "health to "be dirty and unsanitary, It becomes the Con- 
cern of the Jewish community. When orthodox rabbis give a ghet 
contrary to statutory laws of divorce, often resulting in grave dis- 
turbances to the domestic relations of innocent parties, it is the 
concern of the Jews as a whole. When the establishment of syna- 
gogues during the high holidays degenerates into sordid commercial- 
ism, it becomes the affair of all of us. 

Something has been accomplished in the industrial field, where 
in many cases of labor troubles in Jewish industries conciliation and 
agreement have been brought about through the intelligent and im- 
partial intercession of that body. Something has been done in dis- 
closing and suppressing, in co-operation with the city authorities, the 
vicious elements among our people, whose unsavory practices became 
a stench in the nostrils of the whole country and a humiliating re- 
flection upon a people who had possessed a long and ancient record 
of clean and wholesome living and profound regard for law and 
order. Something has been achieved in promoting better co-ordina- 
tion among the philanthropic activities of the community, though this 
field, because of the substantial interests involved and the compara- 
tively strong co-operation already existing, demanded less of the 
Kehilla's attention than the other fields of its activity. In the federa- 
tion of the employment bureau activities, a promising beginning has 
been made in philanthropic co-ordination, and in the projection of 
the Bureau of Philanthropic Research there has been placed at the 
community's service an adequate instrument of community study 
and planning. Another achievement of a notable character has been 
the projection of the School for Communal Workers, of which you 
will hear in detail to-morrow. The thoroughness of its plan of 
organization and curriculum is, like the plan of the Bureau of 
Research, indicative of the methods employed in bringing about co- 
operation of all the helpful elements involved. 

It has not as yet, however, succeeded in becoming the central 
authority or completely delegated mouthpiece of community senti- 
ment. This it can only become when all the elements and groups 
join. It has not yet acquired a position where it can prevent ill- 
considered deeds and words of irresponsible individuals who pre- 
sume to speak in the community's name or on behalf of any section 
of them. But it has attained sufficient prestige to discourage, here 
and there, injudicious communal activities and to hamper their de- 
velopment. Believing thoroughly in the value of encouraging initia- 
tive on the part of all groups for communal work, it has only rarely 
raised its voice in public protest against irresponsible and unwise 

11 



movements, preferring to render friendly advice and to direct them 
into proper and useful channels. In one instance last winter, how- 
ever, it felt impelled to administer a public rebuke to a Jewish 
municipal court judge, who carried on public agitation for the relief 
of families on the East Side threatened with eviction in a way which 
reflected upon the capacity of the United Hebrew Charities to deal 
with this problem. The public interest aroused prompted the Mayor 
to have an investigation made without our knowledge. At a public 
meeting called later by the judicial — though in this instance not 
judicious — agitator, the Mayor himself voiced a protest against his 
plans for a new organization, reporting that his investigators, under 
the Commissioner of Accounts, found the Charities had adequately 
provided for all the needs. By the action of this judge, whose 
motives I do not venture to analyze, the community was placed in 
the embarrassing situation of requiring defense from the outside 
against an attack from within. This is the kind of situation which a 
community which values its self-respect cannot altogether relish. 

III. 

Granting then, if we will, the soundness of the principles under- 
lying community co-operation and organization here postulated, we 
come to a consideration of the national community problem. Here 
we are also beset with many difficulties. If our local communities 
were logically and effectively organized on every side, a national 
union of forces would simply mean a union of local communities. 
A democratic national federation would be a comparatively simple 
problem. As I stated in the beginning, there has been much dis- 
satisfaction expressed with the leadership which now obtains in 
matters affecting our people throughout the country, the way in 
which this leadership has been developed, and some of the methods 
employed in its exercise. The proposed Jewish congress is in some 
measure a protest against it. Though unquestionably this move- 
ment for a congress has not the support of the majority of the im- 
portant groups and its leadership is itself not by any means free 
from just criticism, it indicates that the time has come for the 
establishment of a unified national organization, which, analogous to 
the local community, must secure its authority to speak from the 
Jewish people throughout the land. To effect such an organization 
is no easy task. It is a problem of creative statesmanship which 
cannot be solved merely by popular clamor and vituperative criticism. 
The American Jewish Committee had not been organized to deal 

12 



with all Jewish problems arising in this country, but only to prevent 
the infraction of civic and religious rights of Jews, to secure for 
them equality of economic, social and educational opportunity, and 
to raise and administer relief funds in case of calamities. Of late, 
however, by virtue of the influence of its membership, it has found 
itself in a position of responsibility which it had not anticipated and 
for which it was not organized. The character of its organization 
should be changed to meet these newly realized responsibilities. Irre- 
sponsible individuals and groups presume to speak for American 
Israel in the halls of congress and in the White House. Sometimes 
they speak well ; at others times they speak harmfully. But however 
they may speak, they do not speak with authority for American 
Jewry. The time has come when the Jews of this country should 
establish for themselves an authoritative body which will properly 
and accurately voice their sentiments on all questions in which they 
have a legitimate interest. The American Jewish Committee has, 
up to this time, been the nearest approach to such an authoritative 
body, consisting of men who, by lives of conspicuous devotion to the 
communal interests of our people, have earned the right to leader- 
ship. Nevertheless, the method of their selection has been repugnant 
even to a great many of our people who are satisfied to follow their 
leadership. Nor have their methods always been acceptable to the 
masses. I think it would not be amiss to say that, had this Commit- 
tee been democratically selected and had it taken more interest in 
the local problems of interior communities ; had it not only invoked 
their co-operation, but given them some; had it not merely uttered 
fiats, but sought their advice; had it not acted under an astonishingly 
short-sighted policy of administrative economy ; had it employed the 
ablest field staff of propagandists and community workers all over 
the country, contributing advice and service to interior communities 
in their local problems, thereby enlisting their good will and placing 
them under obligations, and co-ordinating them for national and 
international purposes, the influence of the American Jewish Com- 
mittee would have permeated every community. 

The same broad principles basic to effective local community 
organization should be fundamental in the re-organization of an 
American Jewish Committee. All groups — men and women, new- 
comers and older settlers, religious and industrial bodies, fraternal 
and philanthropic, social and educational — should be united. 



13 



IV. 

There is another consideration which must be emphasized, be- 
cause it has been sadly lacking in community effort everywhere. 
There has been lacking in every community well-defined means of 
knowing community needs and resources. This has been particularly 
noticeable in the larger cities, where the population is numerous and 
the activities varied. The result has been a failure clearly to define 
programs of community work. Whatever progress has been made 
has been fortuitous, sporadic and sometimes unintelligent. Very 
little systematic study has been carried on of population, or birth 
rates, and very few other social statistics have been gathered. Our 
communities are in the position where they do not know themselves. 

In New York this situation has been recognized for some time. 
To remedy it there has been established the Bureau of Philanthropic 
Research, which, as has been stated, is now in existence and busily 
engaged in work. The introductory statement in the report of the 
Committee on Plan and Scope, which will apply to any community 
of considerable size, reads as follows : 

"The Jews of Greater New York to-day number over one 
million people and present a problem for philanthropy which, 
in the variety of its needs, multiplicity of agencies and extent 
of financial requirements, is comparable with the problems 
of the municipality. The charitable activities of the Jews in 
New York are carried on by about one hundred organizations, 
some of considerable size. In addition, there are a number 
of small societies local in character, and a variety of mutual 
benefit societies and lodges. The total expenditures of these 
organizations are unknown. It is probable that the budgets of 
the larger organizations alone during the fiscal year exceed 
three million dollars. 

"Notwithstanding the number of organizations engaged in 
philanthropic endeavor, no systematic study or survey has 
even been attempted to determine whether they meet all the 
needs of the community ; there is no available data regarding 
the community's needs or resources. Whether existing insti- 
tutions fulfill their purpose or duplicate one another's work 
is unknown. Attempts to bring about greater co-ordination 
and co-operation between existing institutions have been lim- 
ited and meagre. The committee is of the opinion that there 
is a demand for a Bureau of Philanthropic Research, for the 

14 



reason that with all the existing organizations there is not 
one specifically employed to study the underlying causes 
and effects of Jewish poverty with a view to its reduction and 
prevention. The existing relief societies, child-caring insti- 
tutions, hospitals, etc., devote themselves to their specific 
problems. There is urgent need for a new organization 
equipped with trained workers to study the larger charitable 
problems of the community ; to investigate existing condi- 
tions, and to help in the solution of the new problems which 
are daily arising." 

After this Bureau has acquired experience and technique, it might 
well develop into a national bureau, not only for philanthropic re- 
search, but for Jewish research in general, absorbing in the process 
the present Bureau of Statistics of the American Jewish Committee, 
so that a knowledge of the life^of the Jews from every side may be 
secured as a basis for action by any particular Jewish community 
or by the Jews of the country at large. 

TO SUMMARIZE: 

1. Serious differences obtain among various groups. 

2. The present situation is one not of lack in number of organi- 
sations, but of haphazard, aimless organization. 

3. Leadership has not been delegated, but has been benevolently 
assumed. 

4. Certain aspects of Jewish life have been over-emphasized and 
others under-emphasized. 

5. There has been no conscious, comprehensive community 
planning. 

To effect co-operation and unity of action : 

1. Tolerance if not mutual respect must obtain for differences 
of viewpoint. 

2. There must be a recognition on the part of all that the Jewish 
problem concerns all. 

3. That the problem includes all phases of Jewish life. 

4. That the leadership must be representative of all elements. 

5. That the leadership must base its action on actual knowledge 
gained by careful study and analysis. 

15 



V iviu 



W §4 






^ 



I* 






% 



4 



% 



P^ V 





*+tf 



'♦.To' A o' t$> ♦ 






.# 








i v . t * 



*W 





















• / V 1 

A V 6 o " <» ♦ <S^ 




^9 •XS^FW'2* VV 












a 



6 o" 



% 



V -F.7- A <* ^T7i» .6* "o * 



v^v 

*•».*> v 








.j> \'^'\</ V^'V "V*^ T V 

%b, »F.T* A <> ♦TRv <&* ^ *••»• .A 



Si 



&r/^ 



WERT 

BOOKBINDING 

Crantnlle. P a 
No* Dec 1988 





^ .^ 



- 



M% *§mmmmmm 



